A possible editorial improvement. In the last paragraph of Rationale, there are lots of 'because' in a sentence:

The R7RS doesn't specify it because it doesn't have to specify it because in the R7RS for any variable, either all of the ellipses in the template iterate ...

Maybe because I'm not a native English speaker but I need to reread it to make sure I parse it correctly. It's not ambiguous once parsed, but how about something like the following?

The R7RS doesn't specify it because it doesn't have to, since in the R7RS for any variable, ...

Regarding the spec, I just added the extension to Gauche and saw no issues.

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Arthur A. Gleckler <xxxxxx@speechcode.com> wrote:

Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen, author of SRFI 149, Basic
Syntax-rules Template Extensions, has asked me to announce
"last call" for this SRFI. He believes that it is ready for
finalization, but would like to give reviewers one last
chance to submit corrections and feedback before we finalize
it.

<https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-149>

In particular, I appeal to anyone reading this to try the
sample implementation, run the tests, and send feedback
about your results.

If you're interested in this SRFI, please give your feedback
via the SRFI 149 mailing list before 2017/5/30. After that,
assuming that no major revisions are required, we will
declare it final.

Regards,

SRFI Editor
To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=HPnO69Ijc0fnLAmtlfwu0Yu43aG4fvix